NFL 2022

[jfish26]

The NFL wanted the game played that night.

I don't think there is really support for this. Loose reports of the warmup period are not the same thing as the picture you paint, which is that the NFL said "go" and the players refused.

As crass and stupid as the NFL is and can be, I do not see facts supporting the conclusion that, but for the players' and coaches' actions, play would have resumed that night.

[jfish26]

I'll just say this. Say the Chiefs were provided with these hypotheticals on Monday afternoon, before the Bills and Bengals took the field..

1. Chiefs are offered the 1 seed and a bye with a win against the Raiders in week 18, but you "might" have to play the AFC Champ Game on a neutral field, it would be an absolute no-brainer yes.

2. Compared to, say that wasn't offered, the Bills beat Cincy and then beat NE, over a 50% chance that would have happened, the Chiefs now are the 2 seed, play the 7 seed and then have a better than decent chance of having to go to Buffalo in January.

Chiefs take scenario 1 all day, every day.

Yes, good point.

True, but irrelevant.

[pdub]

From what I heard live, and what the announcers said, the players were given a five minute period to warm up and get ready to play. Burrow started to toss the ball. Diggs got his team huddled ready to go.

The coaches got together and things changed.
I think at that point the NFL realized it would be a PR nightmare to push back on whatever the coaching staff decided and eventually made the right call.

[jfish26]

From what I heard live, and what the announcers said, the players were given a five minute period to warm up and get ready to play. Burrow started to toss the ball. Diggs got his team huddled ready to go.

The coaches got together and things changed.
I think at that point the NFL realized it would be a PR nightmare to push back on whatever the coaching staff decided and eventually made the right call.

I think you're overstating the certainty of anything that was going on at the time. The rules call for a five minute warmup period in the case of extended delay. That's all. I do not believe play would ultimately have resumed.

In any case - it's gross (and bad process) to imply that it's ok for the Bills to get the short end of the stick here because they refused to keep going that night.

[CrimsonNBlue]

If you're not doing, here, exactly what you would do in other "no one's fault" cancellation scenarios...then your process here is wrong.

Yes, but it's mostly because the NFL chose to not make up the game. That's not fair to the Bills, Bengals, Chiefs, or even the Ravens. Making the game up after Week 18 isn't ideal, either, but logistically, there wasn't any other choice. Spiking the game is what is causing the issues here and is why the process is wrong.

I don't disagree with that. And if the fact is that (1) there was NOT a plan for what to do with a game you don't make up before the playoffs, AND (2) this IS what you would have done in any other "no fault" cancellation scenario, then ok, whatever.

But it does not make any sense at all that, during Covid especially, no one had ever considered this scenario. Of course they did - we all did! And if the plan all along was to do something like what's being done here...it would have been announced that way, probably a day or three ago.

So that's why this just smells like deviating from the plan/rules, because of the specific details of the scenario. And that, while well-intentioned, is not good process.

2 byes during COVID season, right?

[CrimsonNBlue]

I tend to think that:

Goodell/NFLHQ wanted 8 teams per conference playoffs and neutral AFC Title Game.

Most owners hated it.

NFLPA said no fucking way.

[CrimsonNBlue]

I'll just say this. Say the Chiefs were provided with these hypotheticals on Monday afternoon, before the Bills and Bengals took the field..

1. Chiefs are offered the 1 seed and a bye with a win against the Raiders in week 18, but you "might" have to play the AFC Champ Game on a neutral field, it would be an absolute no-brainer yes.

2. Compared to, say that wasn't offered, the Bills beat Cincy and then beat NE, over a 50% chance that would have happened, the Chiefs now are the 2 seed, play the 7 seed and then have a better than decent chance of having to go to Buffalo in January.

Chiefs take scenario 1 all day, every day.

Yes, good point.

True, but irrelevant.

I think only relevant for chiefs fans to not be so seemingly pissed off about a shitty situation. Cincy fans can't be happy, either, but are kind of in an awkward position.

[pdub]

From what I heard live, and what the announcers said, the players were given a five minute period to warm up and get ready to play. Burrow started to toss the ball. Diggs got his team huddled ready to go.

The coaches got together and things changed.
I think at that point the NFL realized it would be a PR nightmare to push back on whatever the coaching staff decided and eventually made the right call.

I think you're overstating the certainty of anything that was going on at the time. The rules call for a five minute warmup period in the case of extended delay. That's all. I do not believe play would ultimately have resumed.

In any case - it's gross (and bad process) to imply that it's ok for the Bills to get the short end of the stick here because they refused to keep going that night.

I don't think it's OK.
I just think that's how it is.
As you said well earlier: it's unfair to the Chiefs and unfortunate to the Bills.

[jfish26]

Yes, but it's mostly because the NFL chose to not make up the game. That's not fair to the Bills, Bengals, Chiefs, or even the Ravens. Making the game up after Week 18 isn't ideal, either, but logistically, there wasn't any other choice. Spiking the game is what is causing the issues here and is why the process is wrong.

I don't disagree with that. And if the fact is that (1) there was NOT a plan for what to do with a game you don't make up before the playoffs, AND (2) this IS what you would have done in any other "no fault" cancellation scenario, then ok, whatever.

But it does not make any sense at all that, during Covid especially, no one had ever considered this scenario. Of course they did - we all did! And if the plan all along was to do something like what's being done here...it would have been announced that way, probably a day or three ago.

So that's why this just smells like deviating from the plan/rules, because of the specific details of the scenario. And that, while well-intentioned, is not good process.

2 byes during COVID season, right?

Do you mean postseason byes? Yes, I think that's the case. But that only changes the analysis...if your analysis is situation-specific. What I'm saying is that the analysis should not be situation-specific.

Whatever you'd do in a "no fault" cancellation (that isn't made up) is what you should do here. For the #1 seed, for the AFC North, for draft order, whatever.

This is a "no fault" cancellation. That's how it should be treated. Same as a weather event or water main break or alien invasion.

[pdub]

I think only relevant for chiefs fans to not be so seemingly pissed off about a shitty situation. Cincy fans can't be happy, either, but are kind of in an awkward position.

Any single fan base in our shoes, including your -19 point differential Vikings, would be "seemingly pissed off about a shitty situation".

[jfish26]

Yes, good point.

True, but irrelevant.

I think only relevant for chiefs fans to not be so seemingly pissed off about a shitty situation. Cincy fans can't be happy, either, but are kind of in an awkward position.

I'm not pissed about the outcome vis a vis the Chiefs. I believe this probably is the risk-mitigation deal the Chiefs would have taken were it on the table at 7pm CT Monday night.

My point is that I smell bullshit in the process, and I don't like it.

[CrimsonNBlue]

My point is that I smell bullshit in the process, and I don't like it.

I was wondering when the Sparko conspiracy would come out.

[pdub]

I agree with JFish though I am slightly peeved and think it is unfair.
I'm not pissed - I just don't think the way they are handling it is as close to protocol as it should be.

[Back2Lawrence]

*

[jfish26]

My point is that I smell bullshit in the process, and I don't like it.

I was wondering when the Sparko conspiracy would come out.

Hey, show me the existing (before three days ago) policy supporting this approach, and I'll shut up.

I don't think there is one.

And I do not for one second believe this issue was simply never considered before three days ago.

[CrimsonNBlue]

My point is that I smell bullshit in the process, and I don't like it.

I was wondering when the Sparko conspiracy would come out.

Hey, show me the existing (before three days ago) policy supporting this approach, and I'll shut up.

I don't think there is one.

And I do not for one second believe this issue was simply never considered before three days ago.

I just think it's hard for fans to set aside their understandable desire for the backdoor win and the cute story of Andy Reid hosting another conference title game in one of the wildest of routes/fashion. Were it my team, I'd be on the same boat and fans of other teams would be calling out the bias.

[pdub]

It isn't objectively a backdoor win.
It isn't even a win.

[jfish26]

It isn't objectively a backdoor win.
It isn't even a win.

Eh, getting the 1 (and the easier route that goes with it) at the "cost" of a single possible AFC championship matchup being at a neutral site (rather than at home), as a result of a dude dying (temporarily at least), is very much a backdoor win. Would put some of Bill's streak-preserving luck to shame.

But just because it's a bit of a windfall doesn't make it wrong.

What I think is wrong is doing something different here than what you'd do if the game was canceled (on a "no fault" basis) for any other reason. And I think that's what's happening here, no matter what someone might say to the contrary. Show me the policy - even in draft form, from Covid - that supports this approach. I don't think there is one.

[CrimsonNBlue]

It isn't objectively a backdoor win.
It isn't even a win.

Eh, getting the 1 (and the easier route that goes with it) at the "cost" of a single possible AFC championship matchup being at a neutral site (rather than at home), as a result of a dude dying (temporarily at least), is very much a backdoor win. Would put some of Bill's streak-preserving luck to shame.

But just because it's a bit of a windfall doesn't make it wrong.

What I think is wrong is doing something different here than what you'd do if the game was canceled (on a "no fault" basis) for any other reason. And I think that's what's happening here, no matter what someone might say to the contrary. Show me the policy - even in draft form, from Covid - that supports this approach. I don't think there is one.

But less of a backdoor win than Chiefs getting 1-seed and HFA because NFL decided not to reschedule the game.

The neutral site seems like their attempt to get it closer to "fair," but I do agree with you it seems unplanned. But, I don't agree that it's contrary to any written rule or any precedent. It's a unique situation. And timing is part of it--the game would be made up if it were Week 7.

[jfish26]

It isn't objectively a backdoor win.
It isn't even a win.

Eh, getting the 1 (and the easier route that goes with it) at the "cost" of a single possible AFC championship matchup being at a neutral site (rather than at home), as a result of a dude dying (temporarily at least), is very much a backdoor win. Would put some of Bill's streak-preserving luck to shame.

But just because it's a bit of a windfall doesn't make it wrong.

What I think is wrong is doing something different here than what you'd do if the game was canceled (on a "no fault" basis) for any other reason. And I think that's what's happening here, no matter what someone might say to the contrary. Show me the policy - even in draft form, from Covid - that supports this approach. I don't think there is one.

But less of a backdoor win than Chiefs getting 1-seed and HFA because NFL decided not to reschedule the game.

The neutral site seems like their attempt to get it closer to "fair," but I do agree with you it seems unplanned. But, I don't agree that it's contrary to any written rule or any precedent. It's a unique situation. And timing is part of it--the game would be made up if it were Week 7.

Yeah, I just don't agree that the particular uniqueness of the situation should really bear on how it should be resolved. What would have happened if, like, twenty members of the Bills and Bengals got quarantined for Ebola exposure from Monday-Wednesday? Whatever would have happened there is what should have happened here.

If god's honest truth is that this is exactly what would have happened, I'm good.